(07-12-2022 07:51 AM)JRsec Wrote:  

(07-12-2022 07:38 AM)GarnetAndBlue Wrote:  

(07-10-2022 12:34 PM)JRsec Wrote:  The SEC moved to 20 with: Kansas, Colorado, Utah, Arizona State

Yep, get out your maps.

The Big 10 took: Oregon, Washington, Stanford, Notre Dame

Now only the Big 12 and ACC remained to form an alliance and the values roughly match.

Why? The SEC and B1G are mostly composed of flagships and it gives both conferences late night games and more markets.

It keeps the B1G out of the South.

It squeezes SEC competition from FSU, Miami and Clemson economically.

It expands ESPN markets and limits FOX.

SEC:

Arizona State, Colorado, Kansas, Missouri, Utah

Arkansas, Louisiana State, Oklahoma, Texas, Texas A&M

Alabama, Auburn, Mississippi, Mississippi State, Vanderbilt

Florida, Georgia, Kentucky, South Carolina, Tennessee


B1G 10:

California Los Angeles, Oregon, Southern Cal, Stanford, Washington

Illinois, Iowa, Minnesota, Nebraska, Wisconsin

Indiana, Michigan, Michigan State, Northwestern, Ohio State

Maryland, Notre Dame, Penn State, Purdue, Rutgers


ACC:

Brigham Young, Iowa State, Kansas State, Oklahoma State, Texas Christian, Texas Tech

Boston College, Cincinnati, Louisville, Pittsburgh, Syracuse, West Virginia

Duke, North Carolina, N.C. State, Virginia, Virginia Tech, Wake Forest

Baylor, Clemson, Florida State, Georgia Tech, Houston, Miami




This is just a new approach to expand conversation. It's interesting to consider. I'm not advocating for it. But it would be potentially more valuable excluding a presence in N.Carolina and Virginia. It's ESPN friendly.

If there would still be a massive $$$ disparity between the ACC and SEC/B1G...I'd still be done with college football. I did it with pro sports for other reasons (aside for exactly one game...the Super Bowl because there's often a party to go to). My team would be playing div 1 ball on a div 3 (comparatively) budget. I don't think I'd be alone. At that point, I'd hope my school would focus on academics....and put more emphasis on soccer/olympic sports.

Well, at least you aren't slow on the uptake like many on another board here. I sometimes gave my children a choice between what they thought they wanted and what I had planned for them so by their own decision they could learn that we don't always want what is best, or most enjoyable and decisions have consequences.

This exercise was to illustrate exactly what you deduced and do it without the SEC and B1G disturbing the ACC's world which too many ACC people curse only to arrive at the conclusion that (A) Somebody else is doing it to them instead of it being the result of their schools affirming Swofford's decisions. (B) The Evil Empire of the North or the Evil Empire of the South © ESPN. Or my favorite (D) the damned football first schools of the ACC who don't succeed and work hard enough to pay for their basketball and lacrosse. That's some distorted world view!

This alignment should read, if you get what you whine about everyone but you will advance, and frankly won't need any of you. Do you want to play or not?

Absolutely. And I would expect FSU to find a way to somehow make up for it in all other non-football aspects. Heck...long-term it might be a huge win. A lot more kids these days are playing soccer and you-name-it. Tackle football seems to be on a steep decline in my hood. It won't happen overnight but the sport very well could be no more popular that regular season college basketball in 30 years. I'm pivoting toward wanting FSU to sponsor UCF/USF into the ACC and then those 3 schools be allies (not just football) going forward in all aspects within the state and beyond.